Maybe I'm just being cynical, but could the impetus for this latest remake/rip-off of an old horror movie be the fact that the 1980 original (which starred a very young Jamie Lee Curits) spawned no less than THREE SEQUELS (IMDb LINK)?

You can kinda guess at the quality of those older sequels by noting that the first of 'em came along SEVEN YEARS after the 1980 "Prom Night"...and Scream Queen Curits had absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the follow-ups!!

I'm VERY looking forward to this. One of those horror movies that looks really good. I know, it's not going to be a masterpiece. Cliched-filled or not, I will certainly enjoy this (or hope to)! I mean, look at the TV spots -- They look like they put some razzle dazzle into this picture! I don't know, but that's just me...

I saw this with a friend, and there were only three other people in the
theater, and the movie was fricking hilarious! seriously, if the girl victims are
dumb enough to be making decisions as dumb as running down the stairs
with your high heels on, then you deserve to die! if this so-called
horror movie doesn't have you bursting into a round of laughter once,
I'll be amazed!

I HATED this movie. Me and my parents were able to predict every death before they even happened! The only reason it's not the worst movie of the year is because of "In The Name Of The King". Worst Picture, Director, Actress, Supporting Actor (for Jonathan Scheach as the deranged teacher), Worst Screenplay, Worst Screen Couple (Snow and Scheach), and Worst Remake and Rip-Off. This is way worse than "Deal".

I know what you mean! As soon as she hid in the closet at the climax, me
and my friend predicted that the shadow she saw would be the black
detective and that the killer would pop up in the closet with her. And that's
exactly what happened!

Donnas senior prom is supposed to be the best night of her life, one ofmagic, beauty, and love. Surrounded by her best friends, she should besafe from the horrors of her past. But when the night turns from magicto murder there is only one man who could be responsible, the man shethought was gone forever. Now, Donna and her friends must find a way toescape the sadistic rampage of an obsessed killer, and survive theirProm Night.

Forget about what you've heard about this movie. Forget about thecritics panning this film. Forget all of that. This movie isn't bad aspeople said it was. When horror fans think "slasher" and "PG-13," theyassume it won't mix well, because the base formula for a slasher isblood, guts, and gore. Unfortunately, since this movie is PG-13, it hasbarely any of that.

Now here comes the catcher: This movie relies more on suspense, abrooding, ominous atmosphere, and sound effects to scare the audience,which, more or less works. The bad thing is that there are someclichés. The good thing is it's different from everyday slashers. LikeI said, barely any blood is spilled in here.

If you don't like the sound of that, well, skip this movie. It isn'tfor you. Yes, the clichés are still there, like some big "WTF" momentspop out in the middle of some scenes because of some characters' stupidmoves. Other "WTF" moments, in my opinion, is the unusually high bodycount, which is ten or more. I found some kills very unnecessary but Iguess it was to please the gore hounds out there, which obviouslydidn't work. I was also disappointed in the end.

Apart from those flaws, the film stands up pretty well. I appreciatethat the film was trying to do something new. I love the use of soundhere, and if you know me, I usually don't praise horror movies fortheir sound effects. The use of sound makes this movie more suspensefuland gives it a more dark tone. I also love the way the kills were shot.It was different and unique.

I also liked the fact the filmmakers decided to show the killer's facewithin five minutes into the movie. Judging from the trailer, you wouldthink they'll show it in the end but you're wrong. The performanceswere good. I also felt some sympathy for the characters, which is alsoanother high point in the movie.

Overall, the way this film was shot, the use of sound, and some othermagical elements in this film, like the young, unknown cast, gave thefilm some life. The film is not perfect in any way but I liked that itwas trying to be different, and although it may have failed with manyviewers, whom weren't likely the target demographic in the first place,I appreciated that. 6/10

I know what you mean! As soon as she hid in the closet at the climax, me and my friend predicted that the shadow she saw would be the black detective and that the killer would pop up in the closet with her. And that's exactly what happened!

Really? When I saw that, I thought it was one of the better actual scares in the movie. I didn't expect that at all because rarely any horror movie does it so I was surprised but I guess it's different from other people.

I can see some of what you are saying, some of the the sound and ominous techniques might work if they were given some better direction and if the teens in peril were not complete idiots who have apparently never watched a horror movie before. And as you said, the movie is saturated in cliches and formula(you know that old cliche where the damsel in distress jumps from something she thought was the killer and it ends up being something completely harmless? That happens to Donna about 10 times).

And another thing, why would they show us the everything the killer does, there's never a moment of shock or surprise. You even see the killer check in to the hotel while another one of the teens get keys for the room. DON'T SHOW US THAT! Let us find out later and let us connect the dots you draw out. Another thing, why are you showing us a killer for so often and not tell us his motives? My best guess is that its for sexual desires, so he slaughters her family to get to her or some kind of crap like that.

Which brings me to another point, I find it hard to believe that Donna would be able to heal so quickly after her teacher/killer slaughtered her brother and dad and she watched him kill her mom while she hid under the bed. From the other psychological movies and Dr. Phil I've watched, my best guess would be she ends up dropping out of school and become a drug addict that works out on sixth street. But hey, I haven't had anyone kill my family, maybe I could move on and live my life like nothing happened too.

This movie might have been scary if you were to erase all the horror movies that have come in the past 30 years starting with the original Halloween, but after seeing as many horrors as I have, this is as the consensus says, "a dim and predictable remake of an already dull slasher flick".

Donnas senior prom is supposed to be the best night of her life, one ofmagic, beauty, and love. Surrounded by her best friends, she should besafe from the horrors of her past. But when the night turns from magicto murder there is only one man who could be responsible, the man shethought was gone forever. Now, Donna and her friends must find a way toescape the sadistic rampage of an obsessed killer, and survive theirProm Night.

Forget about what you've heard about this movie. Forget about thecritics panning this film. Forget all of that. This movie isn't bad aspeople said it was. When horror fans think "slasher" and "PG-13," theyassume it won't mix well, because the base formula for a slasher isblood, guts, and gore. Unfortunately, since this movie is PG-13, it hasbarely any of that.

Now here comes the catcher: This movie relies more on suspense, abrooding, ominous atmosphere, and sound effects to scare the audience,which, more or less works. The bad thing is that there are someclichés. The good thing is it's different from everyday slashers. LikeI said, barely any blood is spilled in here.

If you don't like the sound of that, well, skip this movie. It isn'tfor you. Yes, the clichés are still there, like some big "WTF" momentspop out in the middle of some scenes because of some characters' stupidmoves. Other "WTF" moments, in my opinion, is the unusually high bodycount, which is ten or more. I found some kills very unnecessary but Iguess it was to please the gore hounds out there, which obviouslydidn't work. I was also disappointed in the end.

Apart from those flaws, the film stands up pretty well. I appreciatethat the film was trying to do something new. I love the use of soundhere, and if you know me, I usually don't praise horror movies fortheir sound effects. The use of sound makes this movie more suspensefuland gives it a more dark tone. I also love the way the kills were shot.It was different and unique.

I also liked the fact the filmmakers decided to show the killer's facewithin five minutes into the movie. Judging from the trailer, you wouldthink they'll show it in the end but you're wrong. The performanceswere good. I also felt some sympathy for the characters, which is alsoanother high point in the movie.

Overall, the way this film was shot, the use of sound, and some othermagical elements in this film, like the young, unknown cast, gave thefilm some life. The film is not perfect in any way but I liked that itwas trying to be different, and although it may have failed with manyviewers, whom weren't likely the target demographic in the first place,I appreciated that. 6/10

Totally agree with you in everything you said. Took the words out of my mouth. There is a quote floating on this board somewhere (I think its on The Women board) that remake should be left for flawed films, which I completely agree with. The original was complete sh*t. Which is why I was fine with this film, unlike some other unesscesary remakes (cough*Angel Heart*cough)....

Overall, the way this film was shot, the use of sound, and some othermagical elements in this film, like the young, unknown cast, gave thefilm some life. The film is not perfect in any way but I liked that itwas trying to be different, and although it may have failed with manyviewers, whom weren't likely the target demographic in the first place,I appreciated that. 6/10

Again with the usual 6/10 rating. So with the exception of three or four movies listed in this forum, all of them are about "average" in your view.

By the way, moviewizguy, this is off-topic, but you used "whom" incorrectly. It should be "who", as far as I know. "whom" goes is used along the same usage with "him", "her", and "them". The word, "who" would be used in in the same parts of sentences as "he", "she", and "they". You wouldn't say, "them weren't likely the target", you would say, "they weren't likely the target", so the correct way to say it would be, "who weren't likely the target".

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum